Anonymous posting is only appropriate when you are revealing sensitive employment related information about a firm, job, etc. You may anonymously respond on topic to these threads. Unacceptable uses include: harassing another user, joking around, testing the feature, or other things that are more appropriate in the lounge.

desertlaw wrote:Any chance that SullCrom, Skadden, and DPW are waiting because they suspect that Cravath might go higher than Simpson, and don't want to look bad if that happens? Or is that wishful thinking?

DPW will wait for S&C and Cravath to announce and will match the more conservative of those two plus Simpson most likely. That's consistent with the institutional approach. They shouldn't be included in the hoping to raise market crowd.

As an associate at STB (and this is still somewhat speculation but not baseless) -- competition for high-quality associates, especially with Kirkland. Kirkland is the real driver of this increase. STB has lost too many of its best associates who left seeking the $$$ at Kirkland in recent years, and there is real disgruntlement over it (definitely helps with awareness of the problem among partners that Kirkland has approached every rainmaker partner at STB and offered them a job, too). Why STB and not some other firm? STB has by far the most overlap in strong practice areas (mainly PE) with Kirkland of all of the top firms, which makes it most susceptible to poaching.

For the record, the chairman of the firm had a speech this spring where he said the associates shouldn't expect us to be compensation leaders. I guess he changed his tune.

As an associate at STB (and this is still somewhat speculation but not baseless) -- competition for high-quality associates, especially with Kirkland. Kirkland is the real driver of this increase. STB has lost too many of its best associates who left seeking the $$$ at Kirkland in recent years, and there is real disgruntlement over it (definitely helps with awareness of the problem among partners that Kirkland has approached every rainmaker partner at STB and offered them a job, too). Why STB and not some other firm? STB has by far the most overlap in strong practice areas (mainly PE) with Kirkland of all of the top firms, which makes it most susceptible to poaching.

For the record, the chairman of the firm had a speech this spring where he said the associates shouldn't expect us to be compensation leaders. I guess he changed his tune.

Too bad K&E's bonuses have been worse in recent years. Top billers topping out at 2.5x market if they're lucky.

desertlaw wrote:Any chance that SullCrom, Skadden, and DPW are waiting because they suspect that Cravath might go higher than Simpson, and don't want to look bad if that happens? Or is that wishful thinking?

DPW will wait for S&C and Cravath to announce and will match the more conservative of those two plus Simpson most likely. That's consistent with the institutional approach. They shouldn't be included in the hoping to raise market crowd.

I don't anticipate DPW increasing over its peers, its a traditional follower, but the firm would never cheapen out below Simpson or Cravath. They had a very strong year too with PPP & revenue growth % exceeding the others so certainly no economic reason to be uncompetitive.

As an associate at STB (and this is still somewhat speculation but not baseless) -- competition for high-quality associates, especially with Kirkland. Kirkland is the real driver of this increase. STB has lost too many of its best associates who left seeking the $$$ at Kirkland in recent years, and there is real disgruntlement over it (definitely helps with awareness of the problem among partners that Kirkland has approached every rainmaker partner at STB and offered them a job, too). Why STB and not some other firm? STB has by far the most overlap in strong practice areas (mainly PE) with Kirkland of all of the top firms, which makes it most susceptible to poaching.

For the record, the chairman of the firm had a speech this spring where he said the associates shouldn't expect us to be compensation leaders. I guess he changed his tune.

As an associate at STB (and this is still somewhat speculation but not baseless) -- competition for high-quality associates, especially with Kirkland. Kirkland is the real driver of this increase. STB has lost too many of its best associates who left seeking the $$$ at Kirkland in recent years, and there is real disgruntlement over it (definitely helps with awareness of the problem among partners that Kirkland has approached every rainmaker partner at STB and offered them a job, too). Why STB and not some other firm? STB has by far the most overlap in strong practice areas (mainly PE) with Kirkland of all of the top firms, which makes it most susceptible to poaching.

For the record, the chairman of the firm had a speech this spring where he said the associates shouldn't expect us to be compensation leaders. I guess he changed his tune.

desertlaw wrote:Any chance that SullCrom, Skadden, and DPW are waiting because they suspect that Cravath might go higher than Simpson, and don't want to look bad if that happens? Or is that wishful thinking?

DPW will wait for S&C and Cravath to announce and will match the more conservative of those two plus Simpson most likely. That's consistent with the institutional approach. They shouldn't be included in the hoping to raise market crowd.

I don't anticipate DPW increasing over its peers, its a traditional follower, but the firm would never cheapen out below Simpson or Cravath. They had a very strong year too with PPP & revenue growth % exceeding the others so certainly no economic reason to be uncompetitive.

desertlaw wrote:Any chance that SullCrom, Skadden, and DPW are waiting because they suspect that Cravath might go higher than Simpson, and don't want to look bad if that happens? Or is that wishful thinking?

DPW will wait for S&C and Cravath to announce and will match the more conservative of those two plus Simpson most likely. That's consistent with the institutional approach. They shouldn't be included in the hoping to raise market crowd.

I don't anticipate DPW increasing over its peers, its a traditional follower, but the firm would never cheapen out below Simpson or Cravath. They had a very strong year too with PPP & revenue growth % exceeding the others so certainly no economic reason to be uncompetitive.

Anonymous User wrote:DPW will wait for S&C and Cravath to announce and will match the more conservative of those two plus Simpson most likely. That's consistent with the institutional approach. They shouldn't be included in the hoping to raise market crowd.

I don't anticipate DPW increasing over its peers, its a traditional follower, but the firm would never cheapen out below Simpson or Cravath. They had a very strong year too with PPP & revenue growth % exceeding the others so certainly no economic reason to be uncompetitive.

cusenation wrote:How do people think KE will respond for their own bonus scale?

It will be something like market is the floor, above 2,000 gets around 1.2x-1.3x market, 2,200-2,300 gets around 1.4x-1.5x market, 2,400-2,600 gets around 1.6x-2x the market. If you're above class or top of class (so a very small minority of each class year), you're looking at around 3x. Assuming they take into account this bump (during the last bump... they didn't, so bonuses were lackluster then as well).